To mark 20 years since the House of Commons voted to approve military action in Iraq on 18 March 2003, we have curated a special collection of articles from our journal Parliamentary Affairs. The articles cover a range of themes from the Hutton Inquiry and the Iraq Dossier to war powers and the Government's use of secret intelligence.
By Tam Dalyell • Go to article
Summary: Hindsight is veritably a wonderful thing. It is easy to be wise after it is clear how events have panned out. Yet, in my case, I am entitled to be acquitted of charges of hindsight. The quagmire that is now Iraq was foreseeable and foreseen, predictable and predicted. I do not claim a monopoly of wisdom. There were others on the Back Benches (on both sides of the House) who were sceptical—most vocal among such were Alice Mahon and George Galloway (for Labour), Kenneth Clarke and Peter Tapsell (for the Conservatives)… Keep reading
By Alan Doig • Go to article
Summary: In 2002 the Labour government joined the US government in invading Iraq. Central to the justification of war was the continuing refusal of the Iraq government to give up its weapons of mass destruction (WMD). The British government used two dossiers drawn from intelligence sources to explain or ‘prove’ the grounds for invasion, both of which were criticised for their provenance. When a BBC journalist claimed some of the contents were deliberately included or exaggerated by political rather than intelligence sources, and then a source of that journalist committed suicide, the ensuing row led to an inquiry by Lord Hutton… Keep reading
By Mark Phythian • Go to article
Summary: This article traces the shifting foreign policy priorities that provided the context for the Scott and Hutton reports. Taken together, these reports bookend a 25-year period in which Saddam Hussein was transformed from de facto ally and valued trading partner to the most immediate threat to world peace. In neither phase of the relationship was the British public trusted with the objective truth about the Iraqi regime… Keep reading
By Anthony Glees • Go to article
Summary: The ongoing crisis over Iraq has focused public attention on the critical role that intelligence plays in the formulation of national policy. Even before 9/11, serious doubts were raised in some quarters as to whether those in government possessed adequate intelligence about the threat posed to Western states by terror groups and by their supporters in the Arab world. The devastating attack on the Twin Towers made it clear that good intelligence was in desperately short supply. Reliable intelligence had suddenly become an acknowledged public good… Keep reading
By James Humphreys • Go to article
Summary: The Iraq dossier was one of the least hyped and least spun documents to emerge from government in recent years, yet allegations that it was ‘sexed up’ in a bid to deceive the country into supporting the war remain widely accepted despite the Hutton Inquiry. In part, this is because media–management techniques have become so widespread under successive governments that the public and the media have come to expect them. But it is also in part because terms such as ‘sexed up’ and even ‘spin’ are so ill-defined and fluid that accusations are hard to refute… Keep reading
By Dirk Peters & Wolfgang Wagner • Go to article
Summary: Parliamentary approval can be of crucial importance to ensure the democratic legitimacy of military operations as it can establish public consent to the executive's use of force. But involving parliament in decisions to deploy military forces may have negative repercussions on the efficiency of operations, e.g. by slowing down decision-making. As the military activity of democracies has been on the rise since the end of the Cold War, democracies around the world have been increasingly pressed to deal with this trade-off between legitimacy and efficiency in sending troops abroad. This paper surveys the deployment provisions of 49 contemporary democracies to establish whether and how parliaments are actually involved in deployment decisions… Keep reading
By David Beetham • Go to article
Summary: The decision by the British government and Parliament in March 2003 to go to war against Iraq, despite serious public disquiet and unprecedented mass demonstrations, has renewed debate about the proper relationship between elected representatives and their constituents. The article shows that the arguments in favour of the decisional autonomy of representatives, advanced by Edmund Burke and John Stuart Mill and much cited since, are more restrictive than they at first appear and could not be used to justify parliamentary independence in this case… Keep reading
Established in 1947, Parliamentary Affairs is a leading, peer-reviewed journal with a distinguished record of linking the theory and conduct of Parliament and politics.
The journal offers rigorous and readable examinations of a wide range of parliaments and political processes, by authors from across the globe, on subjects which are of academic and practitioner interest and relevant to current policy debates.
The journal is published in partnership with Oxford University Press. It is edited by Dr Alistair Clark and Dr Louise Thompson.
Become a Premium Member of the Hansard Society and get the print edition of Parliamentary Affairs delivered to your door every quarter, in addition to invites to members-only events, discounts on training and more.
In our latest ‘Whipping Yarn’, we talk with Simon Hart, former Conservative Chief Whip during Rishi Sunak’s Premiership. Hart opens up about his time in one of Westminster’s most demanding and discreet roles, chronicled in his new book, ‘Ungovernable: The Political Diaries of a Chief Whip’.
If a crisis or major national event occurs during a period when Parliament is adjourned, there are often demands from MPs, the media and the public for Parliament to be ‘recalled’. But the House of Commons Standing Orders stipulate that only Government Ministers - in reality, the Prime Minister - can ask the Speaker to recall the House. In recent years the House of Lords has generally been recalled at the same time as the House of Commons.
In response to the Modernisation Committee's call for views on 17 October 2024, we submitted evidence outlining key areas we believe the Committee should prioritise. Our submission recommended a focus on: strengthening legislative scrutiny, with particular emphasis on reforming the delegated legislation system; enhancing financial scrutiny, especially in relation to the Budget and the Estimates; addressing strategic gaps in parliamentary scrutiny; making more effective use of parliamentary time; and reviewing the Standing Orders, language and rituals of the House of Commons.
This briefing explains what to watch for during the Second Reading debate of the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill on 29 November. It outlines the procedural and legislative issues that will come into play: the role of the Chair in managing the debate and how procedures such as the 'closure' and 'reasoned amendments' work. It looks ahead to the Committee and Report stage procedures that will apply if the Bill progresses beyond Second Reading. It also examines the government's responsibilities, such as providing a money resolution for the Bill and preparing an Impact Assessment, while addressing broader concerns about the adequacy of Private Members’ Bill procedures for scrutinising controversial issues.
In this ninth instalment of our special mini-podcast series, we continue to explore the latest developments in the progress of the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, often referred to as the assisted dying bill. We are joined by Dr Marie Tidball MP to discuss the amendments she has secured for a Disability Advisory Board and an independent advocate for people with learning disabilities.
